CLASS II. (Hansard, 23 February 1933)

§ Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS

I think that the House is entitled to some explanation of this Vote. I find that the sum involved is nearly one-quarter of the total expenditure on law charges in Scotland. The original Estimate of £25,000 has been increased to £38,500. As there is no opposition, apparently, to the Vote I do not wish to take up Government time, but I think that some explanation is called for. We are told that this is an additional sum required in respect of fees for Crown counsel. Without being 1965 invidious I may mention that three out of these five Supplementary Estimates are concerned with legal expenses and this Vote is the heaviest of them. We are here to save the taxpayers' money and this Government has a special duty in that way to the electors. I therefore wish to know the reason for this enormous increase in the sum demanded for this Department in Scotland.

§ The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND (Mr. Normand)

The necessity for this additional sum arises out of the criminal prosecution of certain persons who were connected with a company called Amalgamated Silks Company, Limited. It was a case of commercial fraud involving a large sum and necessitating the investigation of the affairs of no fewer than nine different companies. In that investigation three firms of chartered accountants were engaged for a year. When the case came to trial it lasted 33 days. There was an appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal which occupied 10 days and the number of documents which had to be examined extended to something like 50,000. It was therefore not unnatural that enormous cost was incurred in carrying on the prosecution. I would like to add a word of explanation. Of the total amount on this Vote only, I think, some £1,600 was payable to counsel and law agents. I should also add that the Lord Advocate himself received no part of that sum. All his work was done as part of the work for which he is paid by his official salary.